Reputation
Nice to see somebody other than Fighter pissing off the locals for once. Of course, Drow Priestess seems to have her own history in that regard. Maybe they should team up to terrorize the countryside?
Any dang way, today’s comic is all about the downsides of Intimidation. As a tool in the social encounter toolbox, coercion and threats of bodily harm are all about short-term gain. Similar to the friends cantrip over in 5e, your best use cases for “do the thing or get face-stabbed” lie in disposable minions, nameless NPCs, and villains you’ve already captured. These are the characters that 1) probably won’t become recurring threats, and 2) have limited ability to take revenge. Think of them as protentional sources of information (Tell me where your boss is hiding!); givers of minor boons (Let us inside the secret speakeasy!); or shortcuts to solving active threats (How do we deactivate the device?).
What Intimidation sucks at is ongoing relationships. If you’re trying to build diplomatic relations with Elf Princess, the jagged edge of a broken bottle shouldn’t be your go-to choice. You might attain your immediate goal, but you might also find a ring of spear tips pressed against your throat.
This biz can be frustrating when you’re good at Intimidate, crap at Diplomancy, and still want to convince a friendly to do your bidding. The best way I’ve found to sneak around that little conundrum lies in rephrasing your persuasive overtures in the form of dire consequences. For example, rather than going the Diplomacy route with, “Lend us the artifact and we will use it for a just cause,” foreground the opportunity cost instead: “If you don’t lend us the artifact, the demons will sack your city.” It’s a bit of a cheat, and you’ll need a GM willing to let it slide, but that simple rephrase can take advantage of your skills while salvaging your relationships.
On the other hand, if you happen to be a Pathfinder kid, then you can always coerce your opponents for days at a time. That’s more of a villain than a PC move though. And more to the point, I’ve never seen a PC so dedicated to Intimidation that they bother to make the requisite checks “once per week for 1d6 weeks without failing any.” Maybe it’s fine for keeping a criminal informant on a short leash as a downtime activity, but in a hobby full of ticking clocks and swiftly-approachign doomsdays, the use case is narrow indeed.
All of the above leads me to our question of the day! When you’re trying to walk the narrow line between “threatening an ally” and “using your best social skill,” how do you justify the use of Intimidation? Have you ever managed the trick without stretching your GM’s suspension of disbelief? Guess us all your best tales of bullying, bluster, and browbeating down in the comments!
ARE YOU THE KIND OF DRAGON THAT HOARDS ART? Then you’ll want to check out the “Epic Hero” reward level on our Handbook of Heroes Patreon. Like the proper fire-breathing tyrant you are, you’ll get to demand a monthly offerings suited to your tastes! Submit a request, and you’ll have a personalized original art card to add to your hoard. Trust us. This is the sort of one-of-a-kind treasure suitable to a wyrm of your magnificence.
my Barbarian had the Rage Power „Intimidating Glare“ for every day use of „Intimidating Prowess“ (adding Strength to the check).
For Diplomacy he served the friendly, smiling hunk of muscle in the background, while someone else sweet talked.
Ever work your way up to “terrifying howl?”
I got as far as Dazzeling Display, then there was a bump in the road in the shape of TPK.
No one ever gets to terrifyingly howl. 🙁
Intimidation is indeed often not the best long term solution for making allies, owing in large part from being a relatively hostile move.
With the sort of characters I like to play in pathfinder or other forms of dnd-ish fantasy it’s not the sort of things I have tried a lot either.
I have had more use of it in games of Vampire the Masquerade through and I think some of my experiences could be transferred.
Firstly I find that the main trick to use intimidate without making too much enemies, is to be more subtle about it and to play more in the realm of the “socially accepted”.
Don’t threaten them outright with death or even direct physical violence. Instead I found that it helped to take inspirations from mafia-bosses, imply rather than state that there’d be consequences for making you an enemy, and don’t forget to include some carrot with that stick with implications of how being your friend would be beneficial. You want more carrot than just “I won’t be an enemy”, but it can be as little as “I’ll give you some cover from other threats who also don’t want me as your enemy”.
Preferably the implied threats should often be something other than mere violence, threats to their social standing or academic career, or just literal career, or other thing they care about from you using your influence are great here. You want something they want to avoid but were polite society wouldn’t find it reasonable for them to stab you if you actually did it.
Abuse any power dynamic in play that tilts in your favor.
Importantly don’t be crass enough about it to be explicit that this is what you are doing, just give off the necessary vibe. If you are too explicit you might wound their pride and awaken their defiance, at least once they feel somewhat safe again.
(This bit in particular can be hard to pull off since the GM need to know what you are doing enough to have the npc respond accordingly)
Instilling a bit of uncertainty here can be a great help, if they know that what you are threatening is bad, and they fear you can pull it off, but they don’t know how far exactly so much the better. That way you can get the best of both worlds. They can fear your potential for escalating to violence to give extra weight to the threat but still have enough plausible deniability that they couldn’t really strike first with being seen as the bad guy, preferably by both society AND themselves.
Cold hard stares can also be useful to show displeasure, but you need to have laid the groundwork first so that it doesn’t just feel like an empty gesture.
You should also be careful about what you ask for, if you intimidate them into giving you support in a debate or access to buying stuff they wouldn’t
sell to anybody or even trying to get them to fight on your side against your rivals instead of theirs against you that’s perfectly fine.
Trying to take valuable stuff or a discount, that’s far more likely to feel as if you are robbing them and thus cause long term problems.
Even with all of these tricks, intimidation is still not a way to build friendships, but it can at least get you some allies for the medium-to-long-term without too many enemies rather than strictly for the short term
I think “the mob boss” is a great reference here. Implied threats are a piece of the “opportunity cost” I referenced in the OP.
> This bit in particular can be hard to pull off since the GM need to know what you are doing enough to have the npc respond accordingly
And undervalued skill in RP. This is the downside of the purely in-character approach, simply because few of us are good enough actors to convey “desired outcome” solely through in-character dialogue. That’s where you’ve got to break out and explain what you’re hoping to achieve.
That’s definitely true, but part of the challenge is that explaining explicitly what you are doing (in this case threatening them) can damage the “vibes-of-deniability” that helps give cover there and prime the GM towards having the NPC responds more harshly and defensively.
That’s certainly something I have to catch myself on when I’m GM’ing, as part of that whole human brain thing where things we already know seem more obvious than they are. Just because I, as the GM know that what was said was definitely meant as a threat that doesn’t mean that it’s obvious to the npc and that they don’t move in uncertainty (or that they could convincingly relay it to someone else)
I have never played a particularly social character until very recently (three sessions into a new campaign!) and my basic solution for 5e (which has a nice limited selection of skills to “worry” about) is to simply be proficient in all of the relevant skills! (On the social side that would be Deception, Persuasion, and Intimidation. But also, while your at it, take a bit of Performance too. You never know when “all of the above” becomes important when “none of the other” is the answer to a social situation.)
With a fully armed arsenal of social skills, I can be confident that no matter what, I can “win” an encounter (aside from a crap roll of dice) and be the go to for the party as the “Face” of the group!
As to how to handle intimidation tactics directly? “Don’t shit where you eat.” In other words, intimidate the people that you are pretty sure you will never encounter again and for the ones you will probably have to speak to again, maybe try a different tactic. And if intimidation is “the only answer” and/or you are pretty sure you will be talking to that person again, make that intimidation roll well, and maybe they will respect it or retain being intimidated later…
“Know your audience”.
(side note, if you have made yourself a “Face” type and you go to intimidate, make sure you are actually attempting to use your intimidation via the stat that is most appropriate, and/or that you have another stat that is roughly equally “STR”rong in the same way, or when the DM tosses that curve ball at you, you might not be ready for it (“Roll a Strength Intimidation as you attempt to bully this person rather than use your words… “).
just as a last thing to say, it also helps if you are already intimidating in a setting where your “race” (species, lineage, heritage, ancestry, whatever you prefer to call it) is default intimidating. Then you can easily play it off later as a situation where “I didn’t mean to make you feel that way, I just… am.” (Tiefling, Drow, Orc, stereotypically etc.)
Persuasion, Deception and Intimidation have an interesting relationship.
Persuasion has almost no consequences for failing unless what you’re asking for is absurd, and doesn’t block you out of Deception or Intimidation.
Deception has three failure conditions: Failing to convince them, failing to get past their insight, and failing the “Smell test”. (If you tell Jim’s wife you’re Jim you failed the smell test) Failing it blocks you out of Persuasion, but Intimidation is an option. Getting caught by Insight or the smell test will usually have social repercussions.
Intimidation blocks you out of Persuasion/Deception, and if you fail pisses people off, but will be applicable in lots of situations where Persuasion/Deception aren’t applicable.
The above is why I consider Deception to be the weak link.
the above is applicable to reality as well as game play 😉
I find that Intimidation is the language of evil diplomacy, but in a more literal way. A just king is likely to be cowed once and give in to your conditions or whatever and then, as you say, put you to the spears and stick your mug on wanted posters forevermore.
But an evil king might be impressed that you are trying to play his game. That’s the stuff brand new, QUALITY minions are made of, and as we all know, quality minions are hard to find. The scene in Star Wars where Leia turns Chewbacca in to Jabba the Hutt for the bounty reward is the perfect example here. She threatens to kill everyone in the room with a thermal detonator, and Jabba laughs, saying how THAT is his favorite sort of scum-daring and inventive. Obviously it’s a movie so we have to have the dramatic escape scene with unreasonable, disgusting villains getting theirs and all, but you can see that the whole thing could have gone a different way. Diplomacy wasn’t the answer there-but establishing yourself as rival powers and threats was.
It’s quite likely Jabba knew it was a set-up for a rescue all along, after all he and his whole court of minions were waiting in the throne room to spring the trap on Leia.
But yeah, that’s a great example of Intimidating negotiations.
Absolutely. But here we’re into the plot demands and one path in the woods splits into two-good ol’ George took the path more traveled in narratives.
Again, it’s not too hard to imagine a scenario where Jabba tries to use the Rebel Alliance and instead of the Star Wars we have, it turns into a Star Wars remixed with Oceans Eleven.
Too bad the Han Solo movie tanked. I quite liked Star wars remixed with Oceans Eleven. It felt like the light-hearted romp I like in my action adventure.
Same. More so since Star Wars is a great vehicle for heist movies. Rogue One was basically a heist movie too, and while it seems that people liked it after the fact, that didn’t do it any favors in the box office.
Make sure you have a plan for when your “bluff” is called. See above Drow problems.
One of the hard things about using intimidate as a Face character is that often those characters are either not able to carry out their threat themselves or might be unwilling to for ethical reasons.
I find a good rule of thumb is to try and be open-ended in your intimidation as the other side of the check can often invent a worse outcome for themselves than if you spelled out your intentions specifically. It is best to never make a threat that you are unable or unwilling to carry out if called on it as failing to deliver weakens your position significantly.
Do you think Intimidate is supposed to be lower-DC than Diplomacy to reflect the greater risk / reward in failure?
This too would make a good metaphor for the OGL fiasco
Truly, this mess is everywhere.
My most effective uses of intimidation was done by my swashbuckler, who mainly succeeded by virtue of being a murderous maniac, with a reputation. Most people knew she could make good for her threats, and that she had a crew and family to back her up.
My favorite uses of intimidation was a Wizard, who was fully untrained in it, but yet constantly tried to intimidate others through the Karen method. That is, insist on speaking to a superior, wield privilege like a club and be so utterly convinced of your own superiority that you would sush an archfiend. Let us just say that he had a lot less success with it than the swashbuckler.
Generally I don´t experience players use intimidation as a way to get stuff from people they want to have a long-term relationship with (Unless that long-term relationship consists entirely of them fearing the players). It is mainly used for short-term solutions. Making a servant tell them the right direction, making minions flee in terror, make thugs back off or have a corrupt guard think twice about asking for a bribe.
The few times I have seen it used against people with whom the players want a long-term relationship it has either been:
A. Against people they want to fear them. Such as keeping a local gang in line.
B. Against people who respect strength. Such as one case with a group of orcs, where they respected the strength of it.
C. Unintentionally. I covered this briefly at the last comic, but my players sometimes do things that are incredibly threatening, while being completely unaware of how they come across. Such as waltzing up to someone while being covered in the blood of their guards, whom the party just murdered, and say “Come with me if you want to live”.
“When you’re trying to walk the narrow line between “threatening an ally” and “using your best social skill,” how do you justify the use of Intimidation?”
Intimidation is not for making “friends”, so at best it’s for making those who serve you under fear.
It might work initially if later another Party member explains the situation over using a better suited Social Skill (from best to worst) like Diplomacy, Leadership, Fast Talk, Public Speaking, Seduction, or even Administration*… and then the “allies” are treated well going forward. But as a long term situation? No Intimidation will not make allies on it’s own, just those who are waiting for and hoping a better choice comes along.
.* IDK, maybe some groups will respond well to the carrot of well-oiled machinery and the stick of fear. Groups that align well with fascism possibly, like D&D hobgoblins, Drow, etc.
I don’t really use intimidate for much. Either the target is someone I’m fine with mauling (I just maul them) or it’s someone I want to be on friendly terms with.
Intimidation can be part of a long-term strategy, but the standard d20 mechanics don’t really support it. How intimidating one actually is is heavily affected by one’s reputation, and how scary you look is also a major factor, so one’s skill plays a part, but only a part.
If you do account for reputation, then one can become more intimidating by following through on threats, and become known for defeating powerful foes. People will be a lot more accommodating to someone known to be very dangerous, and if what you ask costs them little (like skipping tariff fees, or cutting through bureaucratic red tape) it might not be worth holding a grudge over.
Some uses of intimidation might not leave any hard feelings at all, like convincing the suspicious scout patrol that they really don’t want to f*** with you, or pressuring the wavering chieftain to side with you (which will ultimately favor them).
Oh, and how the intimidation is phrased obviously affects how people will feel about it. Instead of “Do what I want or I’ll stab you!”, it could be “Isn’t this such a nice city? I’d love to spend some of my hard-won gold to enrich the local economy! It would be a shame if I had to do something… unfortunate because some people thought they could take advantage of my kind disposition…”
Clueless Drow Priestess could become a favourite character. She’s so much more relatable not understanding why her people’s ways don’t work here. Like in the “classical supplication pose” one.
It also feels like a character who can have an arc, whereas her normal portrayal is more “this character is a threat, and not in the fun way”
What arc are you imagining for her? Actual redemption / acculturation?
It’s a big question. It’s also one I can’t really answer well, because I’m not super strong on why exactly the Drow are pricks. I know their society is “basically Evil” with a creepy spider-goddess, but that can be played a lot of different ways, as with Succubus who is kind of adorable despite being a demon.
The thing that gets me with Drow is that more often than most “basically Evil” groups, they are written as stuck-up intolerant pricks. I suspect it’s because we all subconsciously merge the “well we know we’re better than you” attitude of normal Elves with our experience of intolerant xenophobes and rich, powerful or successful people showing off (similar to the worst sides of characters like Street Samurai or Arcane Archer when they act superior over their background or abilities).
As for Drow Priestess, I think it’s some level of recognition that there is more to her culture than murder and bullying. Evil characters are basically selfish and individualistic, so a series where she interacts with a bunch of other Handbook-worlders and learns sneakiness, manipulation, profitability, and so on could be a lot of fun. Characters like Succubus (charm), Snowflake (sneakiness), Gestalt (management), even Occultist (manipulation) could be a lot of fun. I think the end goal I see is that she goes from being overly self-assured with her open threats to really bad at subtle because she keeps falling back on the threats. Where she goes from there is anyone’s guess (but ultimately overthrowing BBEG would be my choice).
What you can do is lean into the NPC’s social network. She probably has some enemies you can use. If they’re intimidated, you can use that to get her to think better of you.
Not directly related, but my old DM said that he was once a player in Pathfinder’s Giantslayer AP, and made an Intimidate build with such a high score that it was impossible by the rules for him to be unable to scare the AP’s final boss into fleeing. He had to give his DM his word that he wouldn’t do that. (PF1 Intimidate is kind of broken for combat purposes if you lean into it.)
…Now that I think about it, that’s probably the answer to this problem. Intimidate is bad for long-term relationships, but it has more combat utility than Diplomacy. So they’re each good at different things.
It’s pretty common, but I’ve never liked the way social skills get split like that. Intimidation is really just a form of persuasion — you’re not forcing someone to cooperate… you’re attempting to convince them that the threatened consequences of not cooperating are real (even if you’re bluffing and they’re *not* real).
The difference lies in the consequences of that attempt… and if it succeeded, it really didn’t matter if the threat was real or not, since the subject will certainly remember that you threatened them and act appropriately in future. They only diverge if the attempt failed — at which point you need to decide whether to follow through on the threat (which you might do even if you were bluffing) or to let them call your bluff (which you might do even if the threat was real).
I guess what I’m saying is that the actual skill doesn’t matter all that much… especially in something like 5e where the proficiency bonus is relatively small until you reach higher levels. What matters is the narrative consequences that flow from whatever they attempted to do, succeed or fail.
Intimidation isn’t the best *social* skill, but being able to Scare someone To Death is probably priceless. https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=837
Typo? The s in stab is not bold.